Tough penalties pledge on animal cruelty

Comments Off on Tough penalties pledge on animal cruelty

Agriculture Minister Michelle O’Neill has pledged her support for the full use of tougher penalties for animal welfare abuses.

Highlighting the introduction of stiffer pledges under the Welfare of Animals Act 2011, the Sinn Féin Minister said she was “totally committed to protecting and safeguarding animal welfare.”

Anyone found guilty of such offences now faces two years in prison and/or an unlimited fine. The court can also disqualify any person convicted of an animal welfare offence from keeping an animal.

In the past, those convicted faced 3 months’ imprisonment and/or a £5,000 fine. The Minister’s statement came as a result of a debate at Stormont on Monday which was attended by the owners of a pet dog put to sleep following an act of cruelty that stunned the public. Cody the collie was covered in flammable liquid and set on fire close to her family home in Maghaberry, Co Antrim last month.

Despite efforts to try and save her – Cody lost her fight for life. She was put down because the burns to her skin were too severe. Minister O’Neill said: “I believe that the new tough penalties introduced by the 2011 Act will be a strong deterrent to thugs who would carry out such barbaric welfare abuses as the recent Cody case.

“I support the full use of the extended sentences available for serious animal welfare offences to include longer periods of imprisonment to ensure that perpetrators receive a punishment that fits the crime. “I intend to meet the Minister of Justice to ensure that the Courts are encouraged to make full use of the range of penalties available for animal welfare offences and in horrific cases like the Cody case to apply the maximum penalties possible.”

The shocking episode of cruelty has resulted in fresh calls for tougher sentences. The DUP want greater prison sentences made available to the judiciary. Paul Givan MLA, Chair of the Justice Committee, told UTV: “If somebody can attack a defenceless animal like this then we have a concern – what could they do to a human being?”

Ms O’Neill highlighted a recent successful prosecution under the 2011 act. “I am pleased to note that in one of the first cases the PSNI has recently secured a successful prosecution at Downpatrick Magistrates’ Court where a defendant was found guilty of causing unnecessary suffering to a dog under the 2011 Act. The defendant was fined £250 and prohibited from keeping animals for five years.” The minister concluded: “The public should be in no doubt that causing unnecessary suffering, including deliberate acts of cruelty to domestic pets, will not be tolerated and that the perpetrators will be punished.”

Animal welfare charity, the USPCA, has welcomed the Stormont debate. David Wilson, of the charity, said: “It’s 30 years of Cinderella for animal welfare legislation. 2011 saw the new Animal welfare act. 2012 has saw full implementation. We welcome any moves to increase penalties.” Cody’s case is not isolated. A litter of kittens was saved from a group of boys in Londonderry earlier this month, who were trying to set the animals on fire. It is believed some of the children involved in the incident were as young as nine years old.

Mr Wilson says an increase in penalties in itself is not the answer – but increased enforcement is also needed. “By increasing penalties [it] doesn’t actually improve the situation unless we have adequate and proper enforcement.” He said the USPCA attended a meeting recently with their counterparts in Europe and the Commission where the issue of enforcement is being pressed “That would be our message – better enforcement.”stiffer

Video & News Link:-

Police and media covering up for Texan Minister in dog killing case?

Comments Off on Police and media covering up for Texan Minister in dog killing case?

Ernest Dempsey — Hardly anybody is more compliant than some media sources when it comes to protecting names of important people, like ministers, in cases that otherwise would bring skyscrapers to the ground by their heinous nature.

The story of Mijo’s brutal killing in Oriole St Alamo, Texas, which has been presented, or twisted, by a popular news channel in a ministerially correct manner is one such recent case.

Mijo was struck repeatedly with a machete when he rambled on to enter a neighbor’s property, or so it has been claimed.

Reporting on the incident, Action 4 News tells that on May 10th, an ex-military employee Luis Ortiz found his dear pet dog Mijo lying in a pool of blood “just inches from his home”.

The channel reports that Luis traced the trail of the blood to the “end of the street” and called the county’s sheriff’s office immediately to file a report of the dog’s killing.

Obtaining the report’s copy from the police, Action 4 News report states that it wasn’t the first time Mijo ventured into that “neighbor-in-question’s yard”. But this time, as the channel refers to the report, Mijo got aggressive, as claimed by the neighbor, and made him fear for his life. So he hit him with a machete to drive him away from his property and family. Further, since the dog was on the neighbor’s property, the sheriff’s office says no charges will be filed.

Readers may already have noticed how the news protected the name of the dog’s killer, all the while referring to him as “neighbor”. For those who already don’t know, this “neighbor” accused of killing the dog brutally by repeated strokes of a machete, he is in fact Texan minister Jose Salazar who lives near Luis Ortiz.

Usually, media reports in detail on people and places involved, unless deliberately holding back names to protect the privacy of people for safety concerns. In this case, the minister’s name already was on blogs and social media as the person who killed the dog. But maybe, Jose Salazar’s name was not to be revealed in so-called “professional” media sources because the time spent in spelling it was needed for including more distortions in the report.

Read the rest of this news:-

%d bloggers like this: